I don't believe that people with the highest repute are the most correct, but consensus and sound scientific evidence goes much much further when making statements with certainty. There is NO proof that a balanced raw food diets are any better for you than a balanced cooked food diet. But more than that, there isn't even a smidgeon of evidence to suggest it. Citing debunked 'research' or archaic theories to support your diet just makes you look like a fool.

My word hardeeharhar.. Are we a bit negative in this thread?

I think you are ignorant or refuse to see the truth when it comes to health and what promotes it.

I can tell you it is not hard to see that those who avoid a high sugar and high fat diet are at less risk of the three largest killers in America Heart Disease, Diabetes and Cancer.

Those who consume less sodium chloride and possibly use something like sea salt or Mrs. Dash do better in terms of managing blood pressure etc.

Some foods harm the body some heal the body.

Phytosterols promote healthy cholesterol balance between LDL and HDL.

I would suggest some reading for any and all who have any desire to have better health

Ginger Common Spice and Wonder Drug:

By Paul Schulick

Probiotics: Nature's Internal Healers

By Natasha Trenev

If you read these two books it will spark a new found desire to expand your journey of wellness and health knowledge and action.

Also I personally reject much of the Big Pharma prescriptions given by contemporary medicine. I find that in America we do not have a Health Care System rather a Sick Care System.

If you want health forget "most" doctors as they will only have a surgury or pill to offer you to "hopefully" treat the symptom(s) you are having due to bad choices which have taken your body to a condition of disrepair.

If you want health you have to make some choices and eat right and excercise.

is living proof of what taking care of your body can do for you if you make an effort.

If you like to stay sick and have pills from your doctor just continue to eat processed foods with MSG, High Fructose Corn Syrup, artificial colors, hydrogenated fats and white flour with nutrients stripped out.

I personally avoid high levels of certain foods which produce uric acid in the body which can trigger the cascade of inflamation.

I eat foods with ingredients such as Turmeric which contains Curcumin which is an anti-inflamitory as well as Ginger and Green tea for the same reason.

Anti-Inflamitory.

Thrombosis, sticky blood and blood clots are helped by cox-2 but NOT VIOXX or Celebrex. Green Tea instead.

There are also three other pathways of inflamation which certain foods can help vastly such as ginger.

Digestive enzymes were the main focus of this thread early on. Opponents of enzyme supplements and raw food claimed that enzymes were broken down by stomach acid and were, therefore, useless. Here is some additional information I culled on this topic, from Jon Barron, Baseline of Health. His website is:

What nature intended is that you eat enzyme rich foods and chew your food properly. If you did that, the food would enter the stomach laced with digestive enzymes. These enzymes would then "predigest" your food for about an hour -- actually breaking down as much as 75% of your meal.
Only after this period of "pre-digestion" are hydrochloric acid and pepsin introduced. The acid inactivates all of the food-based enzymes, but begins its own function of breaking down what is left of the meal in combination with the acid energized enzyme pepsin.

In an attempt to overcompensate for lack of enzymes in the food, the stomach produces an inordinate amount of stomach acid to compensate, leading to acid indigestion. Taking antacids or purple pills doesn't actually solve the problem; it merely eliminates one of the symptoms. Ultimately, though, it passes even more quantities of poorly digested food into the intestinal tract where it leads to gas, bloating, bad digestion, chronic digestive disorders, in addition to blowing out your pancreas, which tries to compensate by producing huge amounts of digestive enzymes for use in the small intestine.
The simple solution for most people with excess stomach acid is to supplement with digestive enzymes which can digest up to 70% of the meal in the pre-acid phase, thus eliminating the need for large amounts of stomach acid and also taking tremendous stress off the digestive system and the pancreas.

If you spend years forcing your body to massively overproduce stomach acid to compensate for the lack of enzymes in your diet, what do you think the long-term consequences might be in terms of your ability to produce stomach acid? Eventually, your body's capacity to produce stomach acid begins to fade, with a concomitant loss in your body's ability to sufficiently process food in the stomach.
It's worth noting that symptoms of low acidity include:

This list sound very similar to the symptoms associated with too much stomach acid. In fact, up to 95% of people who think they are suffering from too much stomach acid are actually suffering from the exact opposite condition. The use of antacids and purple pills then become exactly the wrong treatment to use since they exacerbate the underlying condition while temporarily masking the symptoms.

No scientific evidence of any benefit. No scientific evidence that the supplemental enzymes do anything. Jon Barron is trying to sell you snake oil. You are still failing to learn the science behind digestion and depending upon false experts to provide your arguments.

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

No scientific evidence of any benefit. No scientific evidence that the supplemental enzymes do anything.

I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his description of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?

I hear what you are saying, but it is contrary to everything I read, even on LEF.org.

I've read articles in mainstream magazines/newspapers that question the long-term effectiveness of antacid pills. That much is well known. The digestive enzyme part, however, I have no idea about. On a personal level, I tried some disgestive enzymes, just to see, and they didn't seem to produce any difference. However, I will admit that I have a perfectly fine and operable digestive system to begin with.

I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his discription of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?

I hear what you are saying, but it is contray to everything I read, even on LEF.org.

The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes. The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so.
The point of the matter is that perfectly logical arguments built on faulty assumptions are still faulty.
The point of the matter is that there is no evidence that you need extra digestive enzymes. All arguments assume that you do.

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes.
The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so. . .

So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.

Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.

The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.

Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.

So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.

So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.

Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.

The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.

Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.

So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.

The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.

Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated. So not only will you waste money, but you have the possibility of causing disease...

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.

The man has a point. We've been eating cooked foods for arguably longer than we've been drinking cow milk. I have trouble with dairy, but most other white people don't. The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking. It seems pretty sensible to consider that we've adapted to consumption of cooked food.

The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking.

For thousands of years man has been consuming dairy products raw. It is only recently that it has been pasteurized, thereby killing all digestive enzymes. There are two issues here:

First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place.

Second, our bodies "cope" with foods that lack digestive enzymes by first excreting much more stomach acid, and then more pancreatic enzyme, all to help digest food that lacks enzymes. (Read the quote I posted from Jon Barron.)

Some, not all, vegetables require cooking, but if enough raw food is also consumed, there are enzymes present to help digest it. If the whole meal is cooked, I take an enzyme capsule just before eating.

Lactose intolerance has NOTHING to do with the pasteurization of milk -- Europeans are more likely to be lactose tolerant because they consumed over many generations milk (indicating that lactose is still present in large quantities in non-pasteurized milk and that there is no effective decrease in the concentration of lactose due to cow lactase) versus other populations.

snoopy, you aren't even providing your own rational for things, you are quite literally talking out of someone else's ass. How do you do that?

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

Would you prefer the word 'malfunction' or 'run down?' Why does TV push so many purple pills? Digestive problems are big business. No, it doesn't happen over night, but years of excess demand on it takes its toll.

Quote:

Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system.

We aren't discussing disease, but poor health due to improper functioning of the digestive track.

Quote:

Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.

But often not living long enough to reap the consequences. Besides, many foods consumed were raw, like the raw milk that I mentioned in my previous post.

Quote:

Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated.

As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem if you want to continue eating raw foods. I'll stick with cooked most of the time, and I'll let you know when my digestive tract stops functioning perfectly. (And yes, I crap three times a day). Despite my lactose intolerance, I seem to be part of a line that has adapted to eating cooked food.

I'll stick with cooked most of the time, and I'll let you know when my digestive tract stops functioning perfectly.

That's cool. I really don't know anyone who eats all raw food, and I'm not trying to convert anyone. We must do what suits us best. I just like discussions, and believe nutrition is important.

Quote:

As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem if you want to continue eating raw foods.

Thanks. I don't eat that much raw food, but do take enzymes to make up for it at a cooked meal. My wife wouldn't put up with many raw foods, and keeping peace at home is a high priority of mine. When I'm by myself, I consume more raw food.